From a fluff point of view I think it's bad to take away the lance-immunity. the 5th (4th?) edition necron codex which the current necron list is based on had living metal vehicles immune to those kind of weapons. I think removing that is overdoing it.

From a fluff point of view I think it's bad to take away the lance-immunity. the 5th (4th?) edition necron codex which the current necron list is based on had living metal vehicles immune to those kind of weapons. I think removing that is overdoing it.

They were also immune to Multi-meltas and such, so if we're removing MW vulnerability Lance should also have full effect. (It's the 3rd Codex that the list is based on.)

edit: Old Living Metal is a very good translation of 40k Living Metal. The issues are a) Monoliths are perhaps too tough and b) the interactions between old LM and other rules/armies have some negative consequences as well as being very annoying for the opponent.

if your going to make new lists are you going to make them based off new or old codexs?. I ask cus if your going to make them off old ones you should use the old rules for said problem(LM). But if your going to make em off new edition lists you should use the new rules. I dont think it should be mixing and matching rules and lists but I think leaving old rules for old lists and build(even if its slightly edited/updated) new rules for the new lists. Bace the raiders LM off of the 4th ed codex and leave it at that (the exact rules dosnt matter to me, just where you get the fluff/ how you think they should work ideas for the rule) I dont know if the LM rules will ever find that "perfect Balance" that fixes every thing and every one loves and works for every list to come, but make it work for THAT list atleast.

Old lists only for me (including the Tomb World list). I got no interest in the new list - it doesn't mean I'll lock it down in a damp, dark basement and prevent any kind of new list lists to appear, but I'm not going to lead the work on it. I'll be happy to give any support I can give to anybody who wants to make one though.

Changing LM is about game balance and fairness, not fluff. Old LM matches up very well to 3rd ed 40k LM, but I've come to believe that the list would play better if it's changed.

I think its a good idea, just to say - the saves gets a reroll against every thing, or some thing like that... I never thought that there was only a 4+ for LM. And as to why i don't have it in my list, I just don't think it should ever AV needs it, more reserved for the heavier vehicles.

Oh I thought it was both lists, but it's only in BlackLegions list when I just doublechecked) I agree more with your aproach Lord Aron. I wouldn't put LM on the new Armored Vehicle units. Reinforced Armor seems a more appropriate representation of quantom shielding.

During nighttime i put some paint on my necron warriors, and soon or later i will field them . Therefore i have been reading the posts (and concerns and comments) . For me the LM discussion seems to have its origins in the fact that the monoliths are the key twoards the necron style of play.

What about the thought that portals can only be used when the formation is unbroken.

In this case there was to chance to keep LM like it is /like it was - in order to keep it that hard to kill something undead , but to reduce its potential quite a bit (in addition to the aspect of movement for free when broken)

right now it's WAY too easy to break a monolith formation..... if you pack enough disrupt weapons and macro, coupled with a high activation count that's almost an auto-win against necrons

pylons are already at the 'just break and ignore' level, I'd be wary of changing the status quo (and therefore the entire playstyle) so much

breaking them is still a useful thing to do as they can no longer prep + support fire to engagements which makes engaging much more risky for the necron player, I'd suggest limiting them to a single move when broken perhaps to avoid them 'withdrawing' into an inch perfect engagement position, but it's not too horrific atm, they're far from unbeatable as they are....

Yes, like Kyuss says it's very easy to break Monoliths if you want to. Also remember that as teleporters they often start with a BM, and unlike Terminators (who also suffer from low formation size and teleport BMs) they're very likely to activate only after the opponent has had a shot at breaking them. As the rules stand it's annoying for the opponent that breaking them doesn't do all that much, but if it shuts down portals it could potentially nerf the entire army.

Finally, the proposal at the table is to nerf Living Metal, which I think has a cascading effect on the army. I'm not going to add any other proposals until that is tested, so posting batreps with the new LM is much more useful than proposing new rule changes. This isn't just directed at you, Stefan, it's just me being a bit annoyed in general

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum